s
577.68
NllWFV
2009
1
Wetlands of the Flathead
Valley: Change and
Ecological Functions
Prepared for:
The Montana Department of Environmental Quality and
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Prepared by:
Karen R. Newlon and Meghan D. Bums
Montana Natural Heritage Program
a cooperative program of the
Montana State Library and the University of Montana
January 2009
MONTANA
Natural Heritage
Ptc^TKim
Montana State Library
3 0864 1005 8515 0
Wetlands of the Flathead
Valley: Change and
Ecological Functions
Prepared for:
The Montana Department of Environmental Quality and
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Agreement Number:
DEQ#206028
Prepared by:
Karen R. Newlon and Meghan D. Bums
MONTANA
^J) Natural Heritage
•C^ Qf-ofK c^' A ^"^ The University of
^mrary ? S Montana
© 2009 Montana Natural Heritage Program
P.O. Box 201800 -ISIS East Sixth Avenue • Helena, MT 59620-1800 • 406-444-5354
This document should be cited as follows:
Newlon, Karen R. and Meghan D. Bums. 2009. Wetlands of the Flathead Valley: Change and
Ecological Functions. A report to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, MT. 38 pp. plus
appendices.
ii
Executive Summary
Although several reports have documented loss
in wetland area, few studies have addressed the
corresponding change or loss of wetland functions
associated with flood control, nutrient retention,
and wildlife habitat. Wetlands are valued not for
the area they cover but for the ecological functions
they perform, so an assessment of the change in
cumulative function over time is warranted. This
is particularly valuable for those areas experiencing
rapid land use changes that have potentially
impacted wetland area, distribution, and function.
The purpose of this project was to estimate wetland
change in the rapidly developing Flathead Valley
between 1981 and 2005 and estimate cumulative
change in wetland functions. We compared
historic National Wetland Inventory (IMWI)
wetland mapping fi'om 1981 for the Flathead
Valley with updated wetland mapping based on
2005 color-infrared aerial photography and added
hydrogeom Orphic (HGM) modifiers to link wetland
type and wetland function.
To analyze wetland change, we compared
randomly selected wetlands from the original NWI
with new NWI mapping created for this project.
We randomly selected 10% of the one-square mile
Public Land Survey System sections in each fifth-
code hydrologic unit in the study area. Within the
sampled area, we compared each wetland polygon
in the old mapping to the corresponding wetland
polygon in the new mapping, and we assigned a
source of change to each polygon. In addition
to changes in wetland area, we also examined
changes in land cover type within the study area
and within a one-kilometer buffer of each wetland
polygon. To assess the functions associated with
each wetland, we assigned an HGM attribute code
to all wetland polygons in both the old and new
wetland mapping. These HGM attributes were
combined with the NWI classification attributes to
yield a combination ranked on a performance scale
of 1 (high), 2 (moderate), and 3 (low) for each of
ten wetland functions. We used this performance
ranking as a weighting factor and multiplied this
weighting factor by wetland area to calculate
functional units for each wetland function.
We digitized nearly 132,000 acres (53,419
hectares) of wetlands within the study area.
Deepwater types associated with Flathead Lake
comprised over 75% of the wetland area. As
expected, the majority of wetland and riparian
habitats (24,255 acres; 9,816 hectares) occurred on
private lands within the study area. We observed
a slight overall decline of 358 wetland acres (145
hectares) between 1981 and 2005 within the study
area, although estimates were highly imprecise. At
the fifth-code hydrologic unit level, the greatest
decline in estimated wetland area occurred in the
Ashley Creek watershed with 1,366 acres (553
hectares) lost. However, most watersheds showed
increases in estimated wetland area. Within the
wetlands sampled, most wetland changes were
attributable to natural causes such as succession.
Overall anthropogenic changes in land cover
type have been largely changes from Forest and
Grassland/Shrub types to Urban and Agriculture
types, and the Flathead River-Columbia Falls and
Lake Mary Ronan watersheds have seen the largest
changes with over 2,405 acres (971 hectares)
converted. Land surrounding palustrine emergent
wetlands showed the greatest anthropogenic change
with 3,160 acres (1,279 hectares) of Open Water,
Forest and Grassland/Shrub types converted to
Agriculture or Urban cover types.
Deepwater throughflow wetlands consisting of
Flathead Lake and associated lentic wetlands
comprised the largest hydrogeomorphic type in the
Flathead study area, totaling 110,761 acres (44,824
hectares). Wetlands associated with lotic features
covered 13,737 acres (5,560 hectares), and terrene
wetlands totaled 6,800 acres (2,752 hectares).
When examined by watershed, the Flathead Lake
watershed contained the largest area of deepwater
and lentic wetlands with 60,541 acres (24,500
hectares), and the Flathead River-Columbia Falls
watershed had the largest area covered by lotic
wetlands with 465 acres ( 1 88 hectares) within the
study area.
Comparison of wetland functional performance
capacities throughout the study area showed a
38.4% loss in hydrologic functions including water
111
storage, streamflow maintenance, and groundwater
recharge. Biogeochemical functions incorporating
nutrient cycling, sediment retention, and shoreline
stabilization showed a slight increase, whereas
functions associated with terrestrial and aquatic
habitat, native plant community maintenance,
and conservation of wetland biodiversity showed
an overall decline of 15.4%. These changes in
ftinctional capacity were due to both natural and
anthropogenic changes in wetland type and area, as
well as changes in mapping conventions between
the historic and updated mapping.
Although our analysis showed relatively little
overall change in wetland area between 1981 and
2005, we did find changes in wetland functional
capacity, particularly in terms of functions related
to hydrology and habitat. Additionally, analysis
of changes in land cover type around wetlands
showed that relatively large areas of forest and
grassland/shrub have been converted to agricultural
and urban types. These changes have likely
affected not only the quality of these wetlands, but
also the spatial extent and pattern of wetlands on
the landscape, resulting in a loss of connectivity,
reduced water quality, and a reduction in overall
wetland integrity.
We emphasize that limitations exist with any
wetland mapping effort derived almost exclusively
from photointerpretation techniques. Factors
such as photo quality, scale, and environmental
conditions at the time of photo acquisition can
affect mapping accuracy. We also emphasize that
the functional capacity ratings assigned to wetlands
in this project are only potential capacities, and
data on actual functional capacity would require
extensive field checking.
This analysis should be considered a preliminary
assessment of changes in Flathead Valley wetlands
and wetland functional capacity. Data from this
analysis can provide very effective conservation
tools to identify areas with the potential to perform
wetland functions most effectively, allowing
natural resource managers and other stakeholders
to focus or prioritize their conservation and
restoration efforts.
IV
Acknowledgements
This project was funded by the Environmental
Protection Agency and administered by the
Montana Department of Environmental Quality.
We would like to thank Lynda Saul, Wetland
Program Manager with Montana Department of
Environmental Quality, for her support and strong
leadership in Montana wetland issues. Erika
Colaiacomo, Sloane Gray, and Tom Schemm
of MTNHP assisted with wetland mapping,
hydrogeomorphic modifier attribution, and
quality control. Greg Kudray, former Senior
Ecologist with MTNHP, provided initial project
oversight. Jennifer Asebrook with Calypso
Ecological Consulting, LLP assisted with
fieldwork. Dennis Lichtenberg of the National
Wetlands Research Center, U.S.Geological
Survey provided technical advice. Kevin Bon,
Regional Wetlands Coordinator, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service reviewed wetland mapping
and provided many helpful suggestions. Tony
Olsen with the Environmental Protection Agency
provided examples of code used for analysis of
wetland change. Patty Gude with Headwaters
Economics provided data on housing density in
the study area. Melissa Hart of MTNHP's Spatial
Analysis Lab compiled information on climate
and land use history of the study area. Linda
Vance, Senior Ecologist with MTNHP, provided
helpful comments that greatly improved this
report. Cobum Currier of MTNHP formatted
and edited the final version of this report. Any
errors or omissions in the report are entirely the
responsibility of the authors.
Table of Contents
Introduction 1
Study Area 3
Climate 3
Geology, Landform, Soils, and Hydrology 3
Vegetation 8
Riparian and Palustrine Forested Wetlands 8
Riparian and Palustrine Scrub-shrub Wetlands 8
Palustrine Emergent Wetlands 9
Aquatic Bed 9
Land Use History 9
Methods 12
Wetland and Riparian Mapping 12
Wetland Change Detection Analysis 13
Wetland Functional Performance 14
Results 16
Wetland Change Detection Analysis 17
Wetland Functional Performance 26
Discussion 34
General Limitations of the Study 34
Literature Cited 36
Appendix A: Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States
Appendix B: Classification of Riparian Systems
Appendix C: Flowchart for Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Coding of Wetland Polygons
Appendix D: Key to Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Modifiers
Appendix E: Relative Functional Performance Levels for Wetlands Classified with National
Wetland Inventory (NWI) and Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Codes
List of Figures
Figure 1. The wetland change detection analysis area for the Flathead Valley 4
Figure 2. The topographic quadrangles covered by the wetland change detection
analysis area for the Flathead Valley 5
Figure 3 . Land ownership within the Flathead change detection analysis area 6
Figure 4. Streams and waterbodies on the state of Montana's 303(d) list of impaired
waters with Total Maximum Daily Load plans 7
Figure 5. Palustrine forested wetland in the Flathead Valley 8
Figure 6. Palustrine scrub-shrub wetland in the Flathead Valley 8
Figure 7. Saturated palustrine emergent wetland and semi-permanently flooded palustrine
emergent wetland in the Flathead Valley 9
Figure 8. Palustrine aquatic bed wetland in the Flathead Valley 9
Figure 9. Population growth fi-om 1980-2007 in Flathead and Lake Counties 10
vi
List of Tables (con't)
Figure 10. Growth in single-family housing density in Flathead and Lake Counties
from 1980-2006 10
Figure 1 1 . Water Rights Permits as of 1 950, as of 1 980, and as of 2007 in the
Flathead Valley 11
Figure 12. National Wetland Inventory (NWI) wetlands mapped using 2005 color-infrared
aerial photography 16
Figure 13. Acreage of wetland and riparian types mapped on private lands within the
Flathead change detection analysis area 16
Figure 14. Acreage of all combined wetland and riparian types mapped on public lands
within the Flathead change detection analysis area 17
Figure 15. Types of wetland changes (in acres) between 1981 and 2005 in the Flathead
change detection analysis area 24
Figure 16. Changes in naturally modified (beaver) and created wetlands (in acres)
between the 1981 and 2005 in the Flathead change detection analysis area 24
Figure 17. Overall changes in land cover type (in acres) between 1992 and 2001 to
Urban (top) and Agriculture (bottom) from the National Land Cover Database
Change Product 25
List of Tables
Table 1 . Climate data for Polebridge (North Fork of the Flathead), Swan Lake
(Swan Valley), and Kalispell (Flathead Valley) 3
Table 2. Ancillary spatial data layers used in Flathead wetland change analysis 12
Table 3. Change categories assigned to sampled wetland polygons 13
Table 4. National Land Cover Database land cover types 14
Table 5. Changes in wetland area within the Flathead change detection analysis area
(in acres) generalized by NWI wetland type between 1981 and 2005 18
Table 6. Changes in wetland area within the Flathead change detection analysis area
(in acres) by fifth-code hydrologic unit generalized by NWI wetland type
between 1981 and 2005 19
Table 7. Changes in land cover type (in acres) between 1992 and 2001 from the
National Land Cover Database Change Product by fifth-code hydrologic unit 26
Table 8. Changes in land cover type (in acres) between 1992 and 2001 from the
National Land Cover Database Change Product for generalized Cowardin
wetland types 27
Table 9. Hydrogeomorphic types mapped (in acres) within the Flathead change
detection analysis area 28
Table 10. Hydrogeomorphic types mapped (in acres) with the Flathead change detection
analysis area by fifth-code hydrologic unit 29
Table 11. Predicted change in wetland functional capacity between 1981 and 2005
within the Flathead change detection analysis area 33
Vll
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2011 with funding from
IVIontana State Library
http://www.archive.org/details/wetlandsofflathe2009newl
Introduction
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has completed
several reports on the status and trends of the
nation's wetlands (Frayer et al. 1983, Dahl and
Johnson 1991, Dahl 2000, 2006). Although these
reports underscore the cumulative loss of more
than 50% of wetland area in the continental U.S.,
few studies address the corresponding change or
loss of wetland fianctions associated with flood
control, nutrient retention, and wildlife habitat.
Because wetlands are valued not for the area they
cover but for the ecological functions they perform,
an assessment of the change in cumulative wetland
function over time is warranted.
Data from the National Wetlands Inventory
(NWI) are typically used to analyze changes in
wetland area because these data are the most
widely available, comprehensive, and standardized
wetland mapping products available. The NWI
classification system (Cowardin et al. 1979)
provides information on wetland characteristics
such as water regime, vegetation, and substrate
that allow wetlands to be grouped not only for
inventory and mapping purposes but also to meet
natural resource management objectives. Although
these wetland features perform valuable wetland
functions such as providing wildlife habitat, NWI
descriptions are limited to the individual wetland
and provide no information on the wetland within
a landscape context. To fully assess wetland
functionality, other features must be recognized
that describe the external factors influencing
wetland function. Several systems have been
developed that use hydrology and geomorphology
to differentiate among wetland types (see review
in Brinson 1993). The hydrogeomorphic (HGM)
method of wetland assessment (Brinson 1993)
emphasizes the hydrologic and geomorphic
controls responsible for maintaining the
functional aspects of wetlands, recognizing that
some wetlands perform certain functions more
effectively than others. In the HGM approach,
wetlands are classified based on their geomorphic
position, water source, and hydrodynamics.'
Adding HGM descriptors to each wetland in an
NWI digital database enhances the information
about each wetland. In addition to water regime
and vegetation, the resuhing data record contains
information on landscape position, landform, and
water flow path. This information can in turn be
linked to wetland function, providing a simple way
to identify wetlands with the potential to perform
various ecological functions (Tiner 2005).
Although HGM applications are largely site
specific, based on regional reference conditions,
and require substantial field investigations,
recent studies in the northeastern U.S. (Tiner
2005) and Colorado (Johnson 2005) illustrate
the application of HGM as a tool for initial,
coarse-scale characterization and assessment of
wetland functions through GIS-based landscape
analyses. Once a baseline of wetland functionality
is established, a wetland fiinctional profile can be
created that estimates wetland functionalify at a
watershed scale. Comparison of the baseline with
current conditions provides information on the
status and trends of wetland functions, allowing for
recognition of potentially ecologically significant
wetlands, prioritization of restoration and
protection efforts, and identification of wetlands
most effective at performing particular wetland
functions.
For areas with historic NWI wetland mapping,
the enhancement of NWI digital data with HGM
modifiers provides a means of not only estimating
change in wetland area but also estimating change
in wetland function over time. This is particularly
valuable for those areas experiencing rapid land
use changes that have potentially impacted wetland
area, distribution, and fiinction. In Montana, rapid
development in large river valleys has prompted
concern over the potential loss of wetlands and
their associated wetland functions.
Wetlands are typically concentrated in broad
river valleys and riparian areas in Montana. The
attractive amenities offered by such areas often
encourage rapid population growth, increased
' Several regional guidebooks have been developed to assess wetland functions associated with hydrogeomorphic types in areas
with similar environmental characteristics (e.g., Hauer et al. 2002).
development, and land conversion. These
pressures can have negative impacts on wetland
functions including reduced groundwater recharge,
increased sediment and nutrient inputs, increased
nonnative species, and reduced wildlife habitat.
This report focuses on the rapidly developing
Flathead Valley. Our objectives were to quantify
wetland change in our study area between 1981
NWI wetland mapping and wetland mapping based
on 2005 imagery and estimate cumulative change
in wetland functions.
Study Area
The study area covers portions of southern Flathead
and northern Lake Counties and includes portions
of the Northern Rockies and Canadian Rockies
Level III Ecoregions (Omemik 1987). The study
area is over 925,000 acres (374,000 hectares) and
includes portions of 20 fifth-code hydrologic units
(HUCs; Figure 1) covering 29 U.S. Geological
Survey 1:24,000 topographic quadrangles (Figure
2). These 29 quads comprise the change detection
analysis area (CDAA). Outside urban areas, land
use is predominantly timber harvest, wildlife
habitat, and recreation. Livestock grazing and
fanning occur in valley locations. The valley
formed by the Flathead River is largely private
land, whereas the surrounding mountains are
predominantly U.S. Forest Service and Plum Creek
Timber Company (Figure 3). Much of the CDAA
is privately owned (45.9%). The U.S. Forest
Service is the second largest land owner with
30%. The largest cities in the CDAA are Kalispell
(Flathead County) and Poison (Lake County).
Climate
Regional climate is influenced by Pacific maritime
systems and drier continental air masses with cool,
cloudy, and wet winters and warm, dry summers.
The North Fork and Swan Valleys are cooler and
moister than the Flathead Valley and receive more
of their annual precipitation as snowfall (Table 1).
Geology, Landform, Soils, and
Hydrology
The parent materials in the study area are
predominantly sedimentary rocks of the Belt
formation. Major rock types include argillite,
quartzite, and siltite, with localized areas of
limestone. The advances of continental glaciers
scoured the low-elevation valleys during the
Pleistocene, while alpine glaciers influenced the
mountains. Since glacial retreat, valley bottoms
have largely been influenced by alluvial processes.
Many of the lakes and wetlands occur on glacially
influenced landforms such as kettle ponds, outwash
plains, and foothill moraines. Alpine glaciers
created U-shaped valleys and cirque basins, both of
which are favorable for wetland development (Alt
and Hyndman 1986).
Several streams and waterbodies within the
study area are listed on Montana's 303(d) list
of impaired waters. Major impairments include
habitat alteration, flow alteration, and bank erosion
with siltation and suspended solids being major
pollutants. These impaired waters have Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) plans to meet water
quality standards (Figure 4).
Table I. Climate data for Polebridge (North Fork of the Flathead). Swan Lake (Swan Valley), and Kalispell
(Flathead Valley) from the Western Regional Climate Center (2008).
Station Polebridge (1933-2000) Swan Lake (1950-2007) Kalispell (1896-2006)
MAX TEMP
MIN TEMP
HOTTEST
PRECIP
WETTEST
SNOWFALL
53.7°F(12.1°C)
24.6°F(-4.1°C)
July (79.9° F; 26.6°C),
Aug (79.3° F;26.3°C)
22.0 in (559 mm)
Dec (2.7 in; 70 mm),
Jan (2.6 in; 67 mm);
June (2.3 in; 57 mm)
108.4 in (2,753 mm)
55.3°F(12.9°C)
29.8°F(-1.2°C)
July (81.4° F;27.4°C),
Aug (80.3° F; 26.8°C)
28.5 in (725 mm)
Dec (3.4 in; 86 mm),
Jan (3.3 in; 84 mm);
June (2.9 in; 74 mm)
125.9 in (3,200 mm)
55.5°F(13.1°C)
33.0° F (0.6°C)
July (81.6° F;27.6°C),
Aug (80.9° F;27.2°C)
15.2 in (386 mm)
May (1.6 in; 41 mm),
June (2.0 in; 52 mm)
53.3 in (1,354 mm)
MAX TEMP = Average yearly maximum temperature; MIN TEMP = Average yearly minimum temperature;
HOTTEST = Hottest months and maxima; PRECIP = Average annual precipitation; WETTEST = Wettest months;
SNOWFALL = Average total snowfall.
Wetland Change Detection Area
5th Code Hydrologic Unit
Figure I. The wetland change detection analysis area for the Flathead Valley.
I I USGS Topographic Quadrangle Maps Used
Figure 2. The topographic quadrangles covered by the wetland change detection analysis area for the Flathead Valley.
I I Change Detection Area
I I 5th Code Hydrologic Unit
I j Private L-and
^^1 Bureau of Indian Affairs Trust Land
1^ ' City Government
I Montana Department of Transportation
J Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks
■ Montana State Trust Lands
■ National Park Service
■ Plum Creek Timber Company
I Salish and Kootenai Tribal Lands
I The Nature Conservancy
US Bureau of Reclamation
US Department of Defense
US Fish and Wildlife Service
US Forest Service
Water
Figure 3. Land ownership within the Flathead change detection analysis area.
Wetland Change Detection Area
TMDL Lakes
TMDL Streams
Other Streams
Figure 4. Streams and waterbodies on the state of Montana 's 303(d) list of impaired waters with Total Maximum Daily Load
plans.
Vegetation
The lower elevations in the study area are primarily
forested with Douglas-fir {Pseudotsuga menziesii)
and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) in drier
areas, and grand fir (Abies gratidis), Engelmann
spruce (Picea engelmanni), and western redcedar
{Thuja plicata) on more mesic sites. Common
species of mid-elevation forests include Douglas-
fir, western larch (Larix occidentalis), and
subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), with whitebark
pine (P. albicaulis) and subalpine fir most common
at higher elevations (Sirucek and Bachurski 1995).
The following information on wetland and riparian
vegetation communities is taken largely from
Greenlee (1999).
Riparian and Palustrine Forested
Wetlands
Wetland and riparian forests in the study area
include both coniferous and deciduous tree
species (Figure 5). Black cottonwood {Populus
trichocarpa) and spruce (Picea spp.) are common
on islands and alluvial terraces along the Flathead,
Swan, Stillwater, and Whitefish Rivers. Western
redcedar and grand fir occur on low elevation
tributaries, whereas subalpine fir is found on low
gradient streams at higher elevations.
Riparian and Palustrine Scrub-shrub
Wetlands
Riparian and wetland scrub-shrub vegetation in the
study area occur on terraces along the floodplains
of both low and high gradient streams and rivers.
They can also be found around beaver ponds
and on the fi-inges of fens and lakes (Figure 6).
Drummond's willow (Salix drummondiana) is
the most common willow with lesser amounts of
Bebb's willow (S. bebbiana) and Geyer willow
(S. geyeriana). Active gravel- and sand-bars
are dominated by sandbar willow (S. exigua).
Mountain alder (AInus incana) and redosier
dogwood (Comus sericea) are common on high
gradient streams. Shrub communities on the
Figure 5. Palustrine forested wetland in tfie Flathead Valley.
fi-inges of fens and lakes include mountain alder
and alder-leaved buckthorn (Rhamnus alnifolia),
whereas bog birch (Betula glandulosa) is a
common shrub on peatlands.
Figure 6. Palustrine scrub-shrub wetland in the Flathead
Vallev.
Palustrine Emergent Wetlands
Herbaceous emergent vegetation in the study area
is found in a variety of settings with several sedge
species common, including Carex lasiocarpa, C.
utriculata, C. vesicaria, and C limosa occurring on
the wettest sites and native grasses such as tufted
hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa) and bluejoint
reedgrass {Calamagrostis canadensis) common on
wet meadow sites (Figure 7).
or partially submerged species such as water-
milfoil {Myriophyllum spp.), common mare's-tail
{Hippuris vulgaris), and pondweeds (Potamogeton
spp.).
Figure 7. Saturated palustrine emergent wetland (lop) and
semi-permanently flooded palustrine emergent wetland
(bottom) in the Flathead Valley.
Aquatic Bed
Palustrine, lacustrine, and riverine aquatic bed
wetlands occur in littoral (< 2 meters in depth)
and limnetic (> 2 meters in depth) zones of
ponds and lakes or on the beds of slow-moving
perennial streams (Figure 8). Common aquatic
plant species include the floating-leaved yellow
pond lily {Nuphar polysepalum), and submerged
• vi" «<:lijll
Figure 8. Palustrine aquatic bed wetland in the Flathead
Valley.
Land Use History
Fur traders arriving in the early 19* century found
Salish, Pend d'Oreille, and Kootenai villages along
the western shores of Flathead Lake (Elwood 1980,
McKay 1994, 1997). The first permanent settler
came to the Flathead Valley in 1860 (U.S. Bureau
of Reclamation 2008). Kalispell, the largest city in
the area, was incorporated in 1 892, soon after the
arrival of the Great Northern Railway. Livestock
grazing, agriculture, and timber harvest have been
common land uses since European settlement.
Irrigated agriculture began as early as the 1 880s
in the Ashley Creek area of the Flathead Valley
(U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 2008). Large-scale
hydroelectric projects in the area include Hungry
Horse Dam on the South Fork of the Flathead
River, completed in 1952, and Kerr Dam on the
Flathead River about five miles southwest of
Poison. Kerr Dam began operation in 1938, raising
the level of Flathead Lake by 10 feet (3 meters)
over the natural lake outlet (PPL Montana 2008).
The populations of both Flathead and Lake
Counties have grown steadily throughout the 20*
century (Figure 9). Growth has been especially
rapid in Flathead County, where the population has
increased by 67% since 1980 (U.S. Census Bureau
2008). Population growth in both Flathead and
Lake Counties has outpaced that of both Montana
and the nation (Headwaters Economics 2007a,
2007b). Similarly, density of single-family housing
has increased steadily since 1980 (Figure 10). A
comparison of increases in water rights permits
over the last 150 years illustrates the increased
demand on water resources within the Flathead
Valley (Figure 11).
100,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
3 50,000
40,000
20,000
10,000
" Flathead County
" Lake County
1980
1990
2000
2007
Year
Figure 9. Population growth from 1980-2007 in Flathead and Lake Counties. Source:
U.S. Census Bureau 2008.
■s oc
~ Flathead County
" Lake County
Figure 10. Growth in single-family housing density in Flathead and Lake Counties from
1980-2006. Source: Headwaters Economics 2008.
10
As Of 1950
As of 1980
I 1 \/*t]dnd C hange Delecbon Area
+ PermH Locatons
As of 2007
Figures 11. Water Rights Permits as of 1950. as of 1980, and as of 2007 in the Flathead Valley. Source: Montana Department of
Natural Resources and Conservation.
11
Methods
Wetland and Riparian Mapping
To analyze wetland change, we compared
randomly selected wetlands from the original
NWI with new NWI mapping created for this
project. To create the new maps, we digitized
wetland and riparian areas using ArcGIS 9.2 (ESRI
2006). We used 1:12,000 scale color-infrared
aerial photography taken in 2005 along with
several ancillary data layers (Table 2) to enhance
mapping accuracy. The NWI classification
system (Cowardin et al. 1979) was used to
classify wetlands. Mapping procedures followed
the USFWS National Standards and Quality
Components (USFWS 2004a) and the Technical
Procedures for Mapping Wetland, Deepwater, and
Related Habitats (USFWS 2004b). The National
Wetlands Inventory originally delineated wetlands
in the study area using 1 :58,000 scale color-
infrared aerial photography in 1981.
The NWI classification system is a hierarchical
approach that classifies wetlands into systems,
subsystems, and classes (Appendix 1 ). Three
systems occur in Montana: Palustrine wetlands
(e.g., marshes, fens, potholes, wet meadows,
willow carrs, forested swamps); Lacustrine
wetlands (e.g., associated with waterbodies at
least 6.6 feet [2 meters] in depth and/or at least 20
acres [8 hectares] in size); and Riverine wetlands
(e.g., occurring within the active channel of a
stream or river). Lacustrine and Riverine systems
are further classified into subsystems. Lacustrine
subsystems include limnetic (> 2 meters in depth)
and littoral (< 2 meters in depth). Riverine
subsystems occurring in Montana include Lower
Perennial, Upper Perennial, and Intermittent.
Classes describe the substrate for Lacustrine and
Riverine systems, and the vegetation life form (e.g.,
emergent, scrub-shrub, forested) for Palustrine
wetlands. Hydrologic modifiers are applied to
each wetland describing the water regime along a
continuum from wettest (permanently flooded) to
driest (temporarily flooded). Additional modifiers
are added to wetlands altered by anthropogenic
(e.g., excavated, impounded) and natural (e.g.,
beaver) influences.
Riparian habitats have never been mapped in
Montana. We used the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Western Riparian Classification System
(USFWS 1997; Appendix 2) to classify riparian
areas. Riparian areas typically lack the amount
or duration of water present in wetlands, yet are
more mesic and vegetation is more vigorous
than adjacent uplands. Woody vegetation is the
predominant type of riparian habitat mapped (e.g..
Table 2. Ancillary spatial data layers used in Flathead wetland change analysis.
Data Layer
Data Source
Year
1 -meter resolution color-inft-ared digital
orthophotography
1 -meter resolution true color
1 -meter black and white digital orthophoto quarter
quadrangles
10-meter digital elevation model
1 :24,000 topographic quadrangle digital raster
graphic
1 :24,000 high resolution National Hydrography
Dataset
Original National Wetlands Inventory Wetland
Mapping
Management and Ownership Boundaries
National Land Cover Dataset
National Agricultural Imagery Program
National Agricultural Imagery Program
U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Geological Survey
National Wetlands Inventory, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service
Montana Natural Heritage Program Stewardship
Layer
U.S. Geological Survey, Land Cover Institute
2005
2005
1990
Various
Various
Various
1981
2008
2001
12
riparian shrubland and riparian forest), although
herbaceous riparian emergent vegetation may be
mapped if the imagery allows for identification
of this type. The riparian classification system
is similar to the NWl classification system in its
hierarchical approach. The riparian classification
system has a single system (Riparian), two
subsystems (Lotic and Lentic), and three classes
(Forested, Scrub-shrub, and Emergent).
Wetland Change Detection
Analysis
Our sampling units were one-square mile Public
Land Survey System sections. We randomly
selected 10% of the sections in each fifth-code
HUC in the study area using the Hawth's Analysis
Tools extension for ArcGIS (Beyer 2004). Flathead
Lake does not have survey sections delineated, so
sections were digitized for this area.
Improved image quality and resolution associated
with the 2005 imagery has enhanced our ability
to more accurately map wetlands by detecting
wetlands potentially excluded in previous mapping
efforts. We made every effort to correctly
recognize and attribute the sources of wetland
change by visually inspecting each wetland
polygon in both the old and new wetland mapping
within the sampled sections. Within the sampled
area, we compared each wetland polygon in the
old mapping to the corresponding wetland polygon
in the new mapping, and we assigned a source
of change to each polygon based on the USFWS
Status and Trends Procedures (2005) with some
modifications (Table 3). For example, if a wetland
was mapped as palustrine emergent in the old
mapping but had been excavated to create a pond,
the polygon was attributed as a "New Pond". If
the new wetland polygon was classified the same
as the old wetland polygon, then the polygon was
attributed with "No Change". We also included a
"Mapped as Riparian" category because riparian
areas were not previously mapped. Wetland
changes attributable to interpreter differences or
differences in image quality were attributed with
"Interpreter Difference" and removed from the
analysis. Additionally, we visually inspected all
wetlands associated with beaver ponds and all
created wetlands (e.g., excavated ponds).
Wetland water regimes can change annually, so we
analyzed wetland change to the class level only.
We estimated the difference in area between old
and new mapping using the spsurvey package for
Spatial Survey Design and Analysis (Kincaid et
al. 2008) in R 2.8.0 (R Core Development Team
2008). We estimated wetland change for the entire
study area and for each fifth-code HUC.
In addition to changes in wetland area, we also
examined changes in area of land cover types
between 1 992 and 200 1 using the National Land
Cover Database Change Product (Vogelmann et
al. 2001 ) for the entire study area (Table 4). We
assessed land cover change around wetlands by
Table 3. Change categories assigned to sampled wetland polygons.
Code Type
Description
Land used for the production of food/fiber. Often evidenced by geometric patterns.
Non-intensive land use and sparse building density.
Land is predominantly covered by structures (high building density).
No change in wetland attribute.
Change in wetland class due to natural changes in serai stage (e.g., PEM
succeeding to PSS).
Oil and gas, mining, wind farm.
Areas in transition (filled, drained), but final land use is undetermined at date of
imagery.
Wetland change due to interpreter error, differences in imagery, etc.
Pond created by either excavation or impoundment.
Wetland mapped as riparian in new mapping.
AG
Agriculture
RD
Rural Development
UD
Urban Development
NC
No Change
NA
Natural
RE
Resource Extraction
OT
Other
IN
Interpreter differences
PD
New pond
RP
Mapped as Riparian
13
calculating the change in land cover type area
within a one-kilometer buffer of each wetland
polygon using the Thematic Raster Summary tool
in Hawth's Analysis Tools (Beyer 2004).
Wetland Functional Performance
To assess the functions associated with each
wetland, we analyzed the landscape position,
landform. waterbody type, and water flow paths
for each wetland. We used an HGM attribute
coding approach developed by Tiner (2003, 2005)
and modified by the Montana Natural Heritage
Program. This approach has been demonstrated
Table 4. National Land Cover Database land cover types.
in previous wetland analyses (Vance et al. 2006,
Kudray and Schemm 2008, Vance 2009) but has
been further refined for this study (Appendices
3 and 4). We assigned an HGM attribute code
to all wetland polygons in both the old and new
wetland mapping. These HGM attributes were
combined with the NWI classification attributes
to yield a combination ranked on a performance
scale of 1 (high), 2 (moderate), and 3 (low) for
each often wetland functions (water storage,
streamflow maintenance, groundwater recharge,
nutrient cycling, sediment retention, shoreline
stabilization, native plant community maintenance,
terrestrial habitat, aquatic habitat, and conservation
Land Cover Type Definition
Forest
Grassland/Shrub
Areas dominated by trees generally greater than 5 meters tall that make up more than 20% of
total vegetation cover; includes Deciduous Forest, Evergreen Forest and Mixed Forest.
Includes grassland areas dominated by graminoid or herbaceous vegetation and shrub/scrub
areas dominated by shrubs less than 5 meters tall with shrub canopy typically greater than
20% of total vegetation; includes true shrubs, young trees in an early successional stage, or
trees stunted due to harsh environmental conditions.
Agricultural Land
Wetlands
Cultivated crops are described as areas used for the production of annual crops, such as com,
soybeans, vegetables, tobacco, and cotton, and perennial woody crops such as orchards and
vineyards. This class also includes all land being actively tilled. Pasture/Hay is described as
grasses, legumes, or grass-legume mixtures planted for livestock grazing or the production of
seed or hay crops, typically on a perennial cycle.
Areas where forest or shrub land vegetation accounts for greater than 20% of vegetative cover
and the soil or substrate is periodically saturated with or covered with water and/or areas
where perennial herbaceous vegetation accounts for greater than 80% of vegetative cover and
the soil or substrate is periodically saturated with or covered with water.
Perennial Ice/Snow All areas characterized by a perennial cover of ice and/or snow, generally greater than 25%
of total cover.
Open Water All areas of open water, generally with less than 25% vegetation or soil cover.
Urban Includes developed open spaces with a mixture of some constructed materials, but mostly
vegetation in the form of lawn grasses such as large-lot single-family housing units, parks,
golf courses, and vegetation planted in developed settings for recreation, erosion control, or
aesthetic purposes. Also includes developed, low, medium, and high intensity with a mixture
of constructed materials and vegetation, such as single-family housing units and highly
developed areas where people reside or work in large numbers such as apartment complexes,
row houses, and commercial/industrial areas.
Barren
Barren areas of bedrock, desert pavement, scarps, talus, slides, volcanic material, glacial
debris, sand dunes, strip mines, gravel pits and other accumulations of earthen material.
Generally, vegetation accounts for less than 15% of total cover
14
of wetland biodiversity; Appendix 5). We used
this performance ranking as a weighting factor and
multiplied this weighting factor by wetland area to
calculate functional units for each wetland function
(see Tiner 2005). This method does not account for
actual wetland functional performance but rather
ranks potential wetland functional performance
based on presumed functioning condition.
Rationale for wetland functional performance
rankings can be found in Vance et al. (2006) and
Kudray and Schemm (2008).
15
Results
We digitized nearly 132,000 acres (53,419
hectares) of wetlands within the change detection
analysis area. Deepwater types associated with
Flathead Lake comprised over 75% ( 1 00,698 acres;
40,750 hectares) of the wetland area. Palustrine
emergent wetlands covered the second largest area
with over 1 2, 1 68 acres (4,924 hectares; Figure 1 2).
As expected, the majority of wetland and riparian
habitats (24,255 acres; 9,816 hectares) occurred
on private lands within the CDAA. Palustrine
emergent wetlands comprised the largest acreage
with over 8,727 acres (3,532 hectares; Figure 13).
On public lands, over 8,129 acres (3,290 hectares)
were mapped, with lands owned by the U. S. Fish
Figure 12. National Wetland Inventory (NWI) wetlands mapped using 2005 color-
infrared aerial photography. Deepwater habitats (LIUB) associated with Flathead
Lake are not included (See Appendix 1 for NWI codes).
Lacustnne Ponds Shallow Emergent Forested Sciub- Rjvenne Ripanan Rjpanan Ripanan
Water and Wetland Wetland shr^ib and Emergent Scrub- Forest
Shore Wetland Rivenne shnib
Shore
Wetland/Ripanan Type
Figure 13. Acreage of wetland and riparian types mapped on private lands within the
Flathead change detection analysis area.
16
and Wildlife Service having the most wetlands
(Figure 14).
Wetland Change Detection
Analysis
We observed a slight overall decline of 358 wetland
acres (145 hectares) between 1981 and 2005 within
the study area, although estimates were highly
imprecise (Table 5). At the fifth-code hydrologic
unit, the greatest decline in estimated wetland area
occurred in the Ashley Creek watershed with 1,366
acres (553 hectares) lost (Table 6). The Whitefish
River and Logan Creek watersheds also showed
declines in estimated wetland area of 91 acres (37
hectares) and 37 acres (1 5 hectares), respectively.
All other watersheds showed increases in estimated
wetland area, with the Lake Mary Ronan watershed
showing the largest increase of 659 acres (267
hectares). The Sullivan Creek watershed contained
no mapped wetlands. We could not estimate
wetland change for the Middle Swan River, Middle
Fork Flathead River-Harrison Lake, Middle
Fork Flathead River-Lake McDonald, Pleasant
Valley Fisher River, and Upper Stillwater River
watersheds because only one section was sampled
within each of these watersheds.
Within the wetlands sampled, most wetland
changes were attributable to natural causes such
as succession (Figure 15). Additionally, 199 acres
(81 hectares) mapped as wetland in the sampled
1981 mapping were mapped as riparian in the new
wetland mapping. Almost 1 63 acres (66 hectares)
of beaver-created wetlands have been lost since the
1981 mapping (Figure 16). Created wetlands have
also decreased across the study area, with diked/
impounded palustrine emergent wetlands showing
the largest decline. This decline was due possibly
to drying of these sites.
MTFish. National Park Plum Creek State Trust Tlie Nature US Forest US Fish and
Wildlife, and Service Timber Conservancy Service Wildlife Service
Parks Company
Land Ownership
Figure 14. Acreage of all combined wetland and riparian types mapped on public
lands within the Flathead change detection analysis area. Wetlands and riparian areas
mapped on lands owned by City Government, Montana Department of Transportation,
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribal Lands, and the U. S. Department of Defense
totaled 39 acres (16 hectares) and are not displayed on this graph.
17
s
&
5
60
So
K
-«:
■^
T3
s:
3
w ■z:
w
s
01
o i
0\
V
c-i
00
&£
•^
»o
B
m
«
r!
o_
.a
ri
U
1
■o
a
a
o
o
■a
B u
a
E b
•■c ^
B
o
u
s u
C/2
■** SB
s b
SB
"T^ 00 r)
00
0^
0
0
00
•^1
'7
— '
— '
— '
^'
rn
— '
i
00
v-,
ro
as
—
—
00
—
n
'a-
1/-1
M
in
so
0
00
d
00
00
^
r--
C5
m
CM
00
0^
d
ON
5
00
00
00
"/^'
(N
rn
—
rn
' '
ri
©
o
o
00
00
d
00
ON
00
O
00
00
On
O
O
On
ON
CNl
_
in
0
ITi
00
_^
On
<o
■^
TT
NO
—
m
1
(N
r--
m
—
'^
■*
NO
—
NO
0
(N
Vi
—
m
rn
-*
-*
■^
(N
ri
d
Cn)
NO
0
iri
iri
r<-i
Ov_
00
00
d
—
rn
(N
■0
■0
0)
m
B.
a
D.
0.
ta
a
S
a
a>
<u
NO
OC
00^
ri
o
ON
o
c
o
r-
0
•0
T3
0
rn
m
ri
0
NO_^
d
00
n.
0.
n.
0.
d
ri
ON
00
0
NO
n'
E
E
—
00'
^ rn
r<-i —
o
rf
n
o
c
c
o
c
1>
(U
rn
00
r-
00
^^
Cl,
Cl
00
•^
NO
0
Q.
O-
Vl
r-
NO
(13
«
-
e
o
c
a.
CO
c
o
c
s
o
c
Q.
Q.
CO
c
o
c
a.
a.
CO
E
B
o
c
n.
CO
E
o
a
T3
<L>
Q.
Q.
CO
E
(U
B
O
B
ri —
— 00
ON
1^
ON
r-- ri
00 d
m o
1/-) — ,
NO Tf
NO —
00
a.
lU
B
O
B
00 r^
Ov r-^
oa
CQ
Da
in
D
<
D
D
pa
.—
CNl
Cn]
(N
<
J
kJ
-J
-J
a;
d -•
0\
'f
r^
On
<^
On
"^
m
0\
m
0
m
—
r~
r-i
<"1
o<
00
d
m
NO_
0^
NO
00
00
o<
00
On
CnI
00
NO
rNi
rN]
rn
—
r--'
(N
r-'
—
00 ■/-! fl
On' ■*" ri
— r^ «
NO — 00
m
u-i
0
m
M
t^
00
10
V©
—
t~~
—
o\
— — . I—
Vi NO M
O — «/^
NO — V5
in '^r 1^
r- r- -«
iri r- 1^
On O NO
cnJ >ri r^
0\ en ft
NO NO r-
■* — ' o
I
pa
C/5
oa
C/5
s
0
t/5
P3
on
D
D
D
D
CL.
D
CL,
2
2
OS
0<
I
18
^
-i
5^
-s:
a
vo
■2 B en
2 «« c
E ~ «
•n J" •'s
"S < u
9>
U
B
"S ■»
ON
o
o
90
OS
•a
S U
« W
01
E t
u
B
01
"S *
« .-
ON
CS
■a
B
;.
u
c«
"B
4>
*•
VI
cs
u
E
u
u
it
M 3 01
^ :£ 1
z. ^ u
o o „
so so
m O
o o
t^
'*
NO
o
NO
(N
On
O O
o od
o
p
o
On VO
a; \o
ON
NO
T3 O
c
o
'a-
oo
o
-o
a.
c
o
-a VI
D- H
T3
DQ PQ
D < _
— (-1 pj —
_j J a. -<
CO
On
OO
I
od
(N
(N
rj
"*■
in
r-
(N
O
r-
ON
NO
r-j On fN "*
— r-^ r-^ Tf"
NO — I r~
oo m
r) >n u-i oo
rj oo
m On
-^ ON
ON On
o
o m
ON —
1^
t^ On (N — "* "^
ON r^ »n
NO O —
(^1 <N —
oo
O
'I-
O
o^
o
no'
O
o
t-~
od
oo
oo
o
1
<N OO
NO
a-.
od
TT
^
00
ON O -^
— o
o r-~ On
"* o «s
_ _ VC
rj rj o
lo v-1 ri >o
NO rj NO T-i
oo — t~-
rf
in —
«n ON
— \o
NO
r)
^
NO
o
M-
00
—
ri
o
od
to
oq
NO
'I-
od
ON
O
r)
NO
VO
On
oo
"*'
ri
— "
t-^
•O
— NO OO
u-i ri r~
^ o oo ri o
ri o — ■ od — ■
-r oo <n —
ri t^ rJ
o\
fNJ_
^_ vq Tf
r-^ m o
oo ON 00
rj ri
ri
ON On "* t";
m Ov ■* •*" >"
OO
r-'
— r-~ >n rj m
p
rj
o
r-
NO
p
tn
>n
VI
—
oo
i^
00
n
rn
n
v-i
On'
NO
r-
00
o
ri
On
rn
o^
00
»n
r-i
00
— "
w^
ri
«s
On
^o
r~
r-
rn
NO
ri
o
On'
r)
uS
m
rn
ON
— '
— '
1*^
OD _ ^
< CQ S 00 L
ri < m oo —
J CL a. 0- -<
J
o
o
o.
a.
t
>
3
'do
5
^
I-. On p — ; NO fj
ri r^ r-^ — On ^
r~- o ON m rj fl
ON n — — — vo
o — "^ rf
ri cnI
CQ CO ^ >
D <c cQ s c^ i;
-^ rj < PJ CO —
U _J Ou 0- Ou •<
to
ra o
NO m VO
rn — 1/5
— r- —
od — ■ "o
O NO
5 NO
ri
r<-i
n
ri
u
C
o
B
u
a
o
a
2 I
(3
(U
B
s
p o\
od o
o
NO lO Tf — NO
od o — o vi
p Tf
ri rJ
I
00
o
00
T3 «n ■^ On
Q. NO ri ON
u
a
§
r^ 1) o
-^ o. —
— . o.
CO
NO
r)
o
03
OQ
D
OQ
s
^
rj
<c
w
s
J
_l
Pu
c«
O
a.
-<
00
'o
(U
CL
c
D.
3
(U
D I ftS
19
a.
o
p
■5
\J
^
I ,
^
-!"
i^i
-t-1
0
n
t.-^
I--,
•N
■;- c Ml
2 « c
S ~ «
u
B
o i
IT)
ON
■o
I »
B U
C/2
E b
u
B
"2 ■»
° B
■a
B U
•a
E t
)— I s u
> ja -o
Z tt "-^
<
■o ± IJ
,•♦- "o '"'
CD Tf
ri — '
ri «-i
1- o
r)
r--
VO
^
ro
0
00
^o
00
in
0^
00
00
1^
00
ZZ
00 00
— ' 00
o o
00 o
ON ^
iri o^
00'
ON
00"
in
00'
o
o
o
o
re
c
o
c
-a
u
re
c
o
c
T3 ~
aj o
o. 00
O- —
re
o
o
u
c
o
c
u
Q.
Q.
re
QQ CO
D <
— (N
o
o
rj ON I-;
m, 00 On
— n t^
On — VJ
t' ON -H
— VO
m On ON
ro vd ri
■* — NO
m in rj
o —
o m
^ ON
— 00
o
o
O rn
r^ On
ri ^
— On --
iri ^ ■^
n m 00
On
NO
rNi
ri
r)
NO
ON 00
00 O
rj 00
ri
NO
ON
00
NO r~ ri -^
I--
On
in in
O NO
NO
ON
D CO S O
r) < tU p-
U O. q. O.
m
LO ri
^
!/J
»-i
^
^
>
0
J
oi
in ^
NO —
m
00
in
in
NO 00 00 —
rl -^ NO NO On
ri o o
NO
On
ri
' —
rNj
ri
NO r^
00
m
m — r~ On
ri
00 «
'n 00
00
00 -o
_■ <u
Q.
Q.
re
c
o
c
-a
D
o.
o.
re
o m
NO On
NO VO
c
o
c
•a <"!
S- ri
9- ri
re
o
s
-a
O.
Q.
re
u
C
o
c
rn
«
ri
r«
ri
r*^
U
S
C/1
m
p
^
U-l
r/1
r^
-M
J
0.
0.
0
<
L.
i^
0
>
U
^
c
1»
c/5
0
lU
_)
I
oi
20
■a
5
C
Is
^
5'
^
■3
3 "«
a
.r-
g
s-
o
; ;
>o
_jj
*^i
-«
C;
b-, *N
•a
9i
■O 41
-^«
B BC
«
c« a
E
S «s
■■■
9j ja
^U
01
u
e
0)
■o «,
« .t;
B s
o E
^
v>
Ov
o
"O
o
T5 2
e u
2 W
ITi
■o
94
■W VI
R <U
•■= <
CB
bd
V
u
e
0*
•a «)
«= .t:
§ i
U J
S5
Vi
OV
90
On
■o
■n 2
S U
(Z)
■a
u
*» Wl
C« lU
E 1:
■•= ■<
Vi
U
0*
-*^
N^
S Ol
^
ttrib
Cod
z.
<
u
,w
"U
*5d
o
U
1
2. *-
"p "5
■e
■S^
«M
>-.
cZ
P5
ov o^ vq a^
— ' r-i o 00
— ' r<^ — oo
— — -^
od
r-
00
—
O
00
in
—
^
ri
»n
^
o
o
m
o
00
r4
•n
>n oo n oo 00
00 — ^ -* Os -^
^ m r) •n r*
O ■^ >n r<l^ ""
r- u^ t^
o6 od 0\
-* <N o
m m f<)
i/T
rj — —
'S; o
— m
vS od
o m
W-)
0^^-^OmO^O^rl0^m^
— o m
— -* -*
o
o
fM
m
r-
o
o
o
m
00 •^
— ' o'
r) — ;
p
O
-a o
o
c
— oo r) o
•^ o
ON rj
o
^
'S-
NO
NO
o
o
oo
NO
NO
NO
T3
C3
o
c
CO
u
a
o
c
>n — r- r-j "*
NO r^
NO On
■n ON
I^ -* D
r- oo oo
— On oo
O 73 O
o g. d
s
in
NO
>/-)
O
>n (N >r^ NO 1/5
r^ — ^ o f»i
r- — rj — o
_' ' ' O
t/-J
»n
»n
rsi
<N
ON
m
—
>n
oo
oo
NO
NO
NO_
no'
m
M
o
o
>n
r-
ON
oo
NO
P
r-'
ON
ri
oo
•n
o t^
_; .^
— ON
— ao
— IS
— t^
■y-i iri r-^ •-<
oq ON
no' <n'
O rf — rr
^-
NO
•^
fO
^«
ri
00
CNl
rsi
oe
■*
r^
m
tr\
CM
^
<N
CO
ON NO ON ir% I/)
OO
00 —
00 oo
m ON
ON o
o
od
CO NO oo Ift
On r~
m O
O 1^
r- oo
NO rj
^'
oo Tj-
— oo
I-- (N
tn 03
D < m
— ri <
J U 0.
„ Oa t/5 DQ c/5 >
to
ji i £
J2 •:= o n
ta. Oi U U-
NO
r-
o
NO ri ri
Ti- Tj- —
o o
NO d
ON
en'
NO o
^' d
'*'
in
tt NO m —
— o
oo
NO
ly-l ON — -!:r
m r- NO
T3
a.
o
— ON
T3 —
^ ri 00
a.
§
■a
1> On
D. On
Cu
CO
u
O
o
c
ON (N
NO
s
oo
o
t^
o
o
NO
-*
o
ON
o
o
00
rn
ON
NO
r)
ON — On
.^ <L>
rC >
•^ On m — ^ ^ f»5
od od — ' — ' t-^ NO ""
— -* r) >n rj On 00
fN -^ fN — -- 0\
r) NO vo
NO 00
-Tf o m ON ON oo ON
NO *r)
I
NO t^
NO ON
o o m NO
0 m r^
01 n 00
m — o NO — H
NO o in
p p
rn d
Tt o oo (*i
r-^ d od 00
DO
pa
r/1
S
oa
C/5
^
D
<
D
oa
r/1
U
U>
rj
rj
<f
UJ
r/1
m
r^
*«
-1
hJ
-J
Ou
CU
O.
Oi
Oi
-<
21
"a
5
a.
tK)
^
«:
tw
5 S
*; B BX)
2 CS B
S - 2
'5? ^ U
IT;
O
O
00
0\
S U
"U
oo
ri
—
01
r-]
ryi
r--
-«^
(^1
r-
E
•*
01
s
§ i
IT)
ON
■a
I »
a t-
« W
iZl
"a
<u
VI
R
!"
S
-4^
<
u
^ £ "S
^ C U
"S "Sii
On
5 -o »
is >>
r-
VO
o
>ri
—
—
i^
o
o
oo
oo
OS
5^
<o
oo o
o
ri
00
vo
o
rn
—
00
ON
fS
r-
00
-f ©
NO m
ON
m
OO
(N
o
n
On
V£>
On
ON
OO OO 00 OO
•^ «/-i NO (N
o
'S-
—
rr,
«r-)
oo
t~-
TT
~-
ON
oo
ON
oo
o
r<-i
r-
in
o
oo
oo
r-
NO
o —
NO ri
m —
NO (N
U~i
o
>n
fN
—
00
(N
oo
n
r<-i
^
ON
NO
r~
o
m
NO
n
NO
c
o
c
-o —
a od
— O rn
O^ "/^ O
ro OO NO
o -a-
O
D. Q.
a. D.
ea CO
E S
c
o
c
On
NO
Q.
^ Q.
C
o
c
Cl
c
o
c
•73 • .
<u — .
D. ri
oo
o
NO
Ov
(N
NO
NO
n.
n.
Q.
CL
ca
(0
E
E
c
o
c
o
e
NO
ri
o
o
' -n
T)
-n
(U
1)
a>
o.
D.
D.
a.
a.
a.
c c
o o
c c
^^
oo
-o
-a
«ri
«n
■^
r4 T
t T3
T3
in
a.
CL
CL
B3
O^'
o
NO_^
m -
NO
1»
Q.
Q.
•^'
E
E
m'
E
E
c
o
c
B
o
c
T3
U
a.
a.
a
m CO in
< D D DO
(N (N (N <•
J J J a:
S o c/^
W u- on
a. 0. a.
u
u
l-l
U
■a
c
-*-
Oa DQ ^
CD c/0 D D
D D rj m
o. a. oe:
Di <
NO
'3-
90
00
rj
oo
r^
NO
ON
o
NO
NO
— Tt —
OO
o
t-~ m ^"
Ti- ON •*
o
r-~ Ov •*
■ •* 1^
— Tf r<-i ^"
-rr — NO ON
o — 00
r-- O O t~;
— o <^i r»5
T|- ri r- f)
o — »s
o —
o
ri
o «s
o- ve
'^ 1/1
o
•^
o
NO 00
NO f»l
— 00
o\
ON
•^
NO
I--
ON
<n
Ov
Ov
ri
00
NO
■a
a
g « S ^
— < w —
J a. 0. -<
o
a.
c
fcu
U-) NO
O rn
NO — t~
OO m f»i
ri — '
o o
o »«
oo
NO
o
oo o
NO o
Ov —
»n f*^
rn
m
NO
(*1
NO
in
r^
»n
—
ri
1/5
(^ ^ Cvl
rn ov o
O ri ro
— NO "n
in o~ —
00 ri ©
tT m vo
00 ri «s
r»1 ^ n o ^
in
^.
00
■^
^^
Tf
o
m
M
ON
—
-^
m,
("vj
in
m
1^
oo
l~-
r~
—
M
'
NO
^-
r)
'
©
ON
r-~
r-
r-
ro
1^
00
NO
OO
ri
oo NO oo r- rr
o r-^ ON NO in
1- 00 oo 00 oo
ON — r)
CD ca it
CQ 2 c^ P D 1
< W CO rj <-] —
a. Oh Oh a: Di •<
o
22
5
60
a
^
.^
-s:
u
1
^
vs
-aj
""i
5
C
r^
C
s-i
■N
■a
"O ai
*; c eu
5 e? c
E M C3
■- a JS
1^^
ii
u
S
«<
■a «,
onfi
Imit
U J
^
m
ON
tl
o
"O
o
>- i.
r<
« o
•a u
S U
« W
(«
73
0<
-w m
a <u
E b
•■c «<
tn
U
V
u
e
U
"B «
«= .t:
Con
Limi
S5
ITj
o\
^H
00
a\
■o
a i-
« W
1/3
"O
a»
«• EA
m 01
E b
i<
H
01
«^
M S O)
NW
ttrib
Cod
<
u u
"2 'Si
u — •-
5 -o ^
!= >^
b
S
o
O Ov O
r~ ^ r-^
o 1/-1 r~
— ^ '
rn v^ rn ON oo
o\
ON
I—
r--
rj
V)
00
fN
NO
ND
r-i
r-^
o
NO
o
o
fN
oo od vo
oo
ON
o t^
'S-
NO
r--
O
OO
ON
»i^
o
o
ON
tn
(N
o
r-i
ON
ir-i
o
ri
r<-i
On
NO
ri
rn NO rn Tf w-1 ri Wv
ri NO Ov rn NO od ON
— O r- NO " tT On
— — NO m — O
rj NO ^ — oo r- o
— ON m oo NO — r^
— — r-- m ri •—
-^ NO
NO </-) 00
oo r-- ©
n -^ «n
—
ON
ON
rn
Ov
NO
o
n
NO
ON
w-1
e
NO
T3 — — Ov
o
00
a.
n.
^
NO
OO
ON
in
C3
m
r-
-*
m
rj
B
o
c
n'
£
8
O
c
m
■T3
ON
^^
r~-
■a
0^■
Q.
NO
ri
ri
CL
a.
ON
o
r-
^
'
CO
^~
'
(0
E
E
<u
u
s
S
o
o
c
c
r-
T3
rr
oo
r-
-o
rj
lU
o^
v-i
ri
lU
rn
CL
o
o
a.
NO
a
£
u
e
o
c
rj
NO
to
E
(U
C
o
c
NO
-a
NO
^™
NO
■a
o
D.
03
rn
O^
00
CL
Q.
ta
"*
O
t^
U-1
— ^
m
rj
~-
£
u
S
o
£
c
o
DQ PQ
< D 03 S yi
rj r) < W c/O
J J 0. pL. 0.
5 ^
o -zi
u
s
o
T3
<U
CL
CL
a
E
<u
e:
o
c
(U o
CL ^«
u
c
o
c
-a o\
CL ^^
as
On
i
DQ >
1/5 D "^^
^ !J 5
0- oi -<
U CA Od
I
— ON ON
NO O NO
^ n On
On
r-- — - NO rn cs
rt ^ a\ ir, QC
r4 ^ ■*
m NO ON ^H
— On Tf fO
r) O OO V)
Tf o — ^ ve
— O iri VI
I
n o oo f»j
Tt O --
— o uo
i
a
CO CO >
c/5 D D ^
^ "^ "^ ^
0- oi oi -<
o -a re
o ^ .> Ji
Z u. oi u
23
Type of Change
Figure 15. Types of wetland changes (in acres) between 1 98 1 and 2005 in the Flathead
change detection analysis area.
-100
-200
-300
^00
-500
-600
-900
13^
B Diked/Impounded
D Excavated
D Beaver
PAB
PEM
PFO
PSS
NWICode
PUB
PUS
R2UB
Figure 1 6. Changes in naturally modified (beaver) and created wetlands (in acres)
between the 1981 and 2005 in the Flathead change detection analysis area.
Overall anthropogenic changes in land cover
type have been largely changes from Forest and
Grassland/Shrub types to Urban and Agriculture
types (Figure 1 7). The Flathead River-Columbia
Falls and Lake Mary Ronan watersheds have
seen the largest changes with 2,405 acres
(971 hectares) of Forest and Grassland/Shrub
converted to Agriculture and Urban types (Table
7). Land within a one-kilometer buffer of
palustrine emergent wetlands showed the greatest
anthropogenic change with 3,160 acres (1,279
hectares) of Open Water, Forest, and Grassland/
Shrub types converted to Agriculture or Urban
cover types (Table 8).
24
Open Water to Urban
Forest to Urban Grassland/Shnib to Urban
Land Cover Class
Agnculture to Urban
2 2,000
Open Water to AgncuJture Urban to Agnculture Forest to AgncuJtxire
Land Cover Class
Grassland/Shrub to
Agnculture
Figure 1 7. Overall changes in land cover type (in acres) between J 992 and 2001 to
Urban (top) and Agriculture (bottom) from the National Land Cover Database Change
Product.
25
-a:
p
5
o
c
a
■-J
f5
.fi
s
a
u
u
.s
s
^
-4iiri
■a
s
R
'b
bX)
a
s
S
s
"a!
R
Si I
o ;■
o
*■ a
a
S
5;
1^
^
e
•5
u
a.
5
O
-^'
u
s
l-N
a
3
^
•"N
a
CN
n
o\
a.
"^
O
exi
s
Ul
a
o
u
ON
r<-i
O
o
00
oo
r--
o
t--
oo
NO
o
oo
O
o
^
O
o
'I-
oo
oo
o
o
^~
o
00
oo
i/S
o
r-^
oo
00
od
(N
o
r^
o
rn
■/-i
ri
'a-
CT-'
oo
o
ON
o
o
VO Tf- —
OO
^O
ON
oo
oo
On
NO
ON
O
o
ON
NO
NO
d
ON
ri
NO
oo
oo
00
od
o
oo
— 1-
o
On
o
o
o
o
o
o
ON
1^
oo t-~
o
On
O
o
o
o
o
o
o
oo
rNi
On
NO
o
d
NO
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
rj
od
m
(^
S
^
o
U
.•a
o
'o
CO
-o
S3
oi
T3
(S3
U
< tu IX
(U
(U
T3
O
o
o
o
CO
o
c
>
5
U I C/5
<u
OX)
o
-J -J
o
o
o
o
o
NO
o
On
O
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
<u
CO
c
o
>
-a
CO
CO
00
o
o
T3
T3
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
d
od
d
NO
d
CT-'
NO
o
o
-*
■*
o
o
o
d
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
CO
c
o
Q
CO
I
>
U
CO
E
CO
U
o
oi Oi
.t Oi
■— « .c
•a
CO
u
<L>
Oi
rr IT oi
c
CO
O
T3
-a
-a
T3
CO
o
b.
c
o
(U u
CO
oo
o
o
On
OO
NO
r4
On
(-Ni
o
d
o
d
NO
od
rl
od
NO
o rj
o —
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
oi
>
^ :t '5.
Z 0-
3
(U
Q.
.S = j:
C/)
Q.
a.
D
26
Table 8. Changes in land cover type (in acres) between 1992 and 2001 from the National Land Cover Database Change Product
for generalized Cowardin wetland types.
NWI
Attribute
Code
Open
Water to
Urban
Open
Water to
Agriculture
Forest to Forest to Grassland/
Urban Agriculture Shrub to Urban
Grassland/
Shrub to
Agriculture
LIUB
0.0
0.0
34.0
338.3
6.7
128.3
L2UB
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.4
1.6
PAB
19.3
15.8
62.5
143.7
26.0
135.2
PEM
22.2
43.6
163.7
1,583.2
79.2
1,267.9
PFO
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.7
0.0
4.9
PSS
6.2
3.6
11.1
154.1
5.3
213.1
PUB
0.0
0.0
0.0
14.2
0.0
0.7
PUS
0.0
0.0
2.7
0.0
0.0
1.1
R2UB
2.7
40.0
15.1
37.4
2.0
102.7
R2US
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.1
0.0
5.8
R3UB
0.0
0.0
3.8
58.3
2.4
21.6
R3US
0.0
0.0
2.0
10.7
13.3
50.0
RplEM
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
RplFO
0.0
0.0
6.9
39.1
3.1
93.2
RplSS
4.7
20.0
2.4
10.2
1.6
1.1
Wetland Functional Performance
Deepwater throughflow wetlands consisting of
Flathead Lake and associated lentic wetlands
comprised the largest hydrogeomorphic type in the
Flathead CDAA, totaling 1 10,761 acres (44,824
hectares; Table 9). Wetlands associated with lotic
features covered 13,737 acres (5,560 hectares),
and terrene wetlands totaled 6,800 acres (2,752
hectares). When examined by watershed, the
Flathead Lake watershed contained the largest
area of deepwater and lentic wetlands with 60,541
acres (24,500 hectares), and the Flathead River-
Columbia Falls watershed had the largest area
covered by lotic wetlands with 465 acres (1 88
hectares) within the CDAA (Table 10).
Comparison of wetland functional performance
capacities throughout the Flathead CDAA showed
a 38.4% loss in hydrologic functions that included
water storage, streamflow maintenance, and
groundwater recharge. Biogeochemical functions
incorporating nutrient cycling, sediment retention,
and shoreline stabilization showed a slight increase,
whereas functions associated with terrestrial
and aquatic habitat, native plant community
maintenance, and conservation of wetland
biodiversity showed an overall decline of 15.4%
(Table 11). To some degree, estimated changes
in functional capacity were due to several factors
including image quality, photointerpretation, and
interpreter differences. We address this in greater
detail in the Discussion below.
27
Table 9. Hydroge amorphic types mapped (in acres) within the Flathead
change detection analysis area.
Landscape Position/
Waterbody Type
Landform
Water
Flow Path
Area
Deepwater
Inflow
2,821.4
Isolated
335.8
Outflow
229.0
Throughflow
99,255.7
River
2,351.4
Stream
616.9
Lentic
Basin
Bidirectional
111.3
Isolated
81.6
Throughflow
3,213.8
Inflow
26.1
Fringe
Bidirectional
3,185.2
Throughflow
1,431.6
Isolated
3.0
Island
Throughflow
66.5
Lotic River
Floodplain
Throughflow
2,855.7
Fringe
Throughflow
1,443.0
Basin
Throughflow
498.8
Island
Throughflow
321.2
Lotic Stream
Basin
Throughflow
8,064.1
Island
Throughflow
2.5
Fringe
Throughflow
551.6
Terrene
Island
Throughflow
0.1
Basin
Inflow
351.8
Isolated
3,855.7
Outflow
476.7
Throughflow
332.8
Slope
Inflow
26.4
Isolated
1,393.7
Outflow
258.6
Throughflow
45.4
Fringe
Inflow
9.1
Isolated
25.1
Outflow
25.6
28
Table 10. Hydroge amorphic types mapped (in acres) with the Flathead change detection analys
unit.
s area by fifth-code hydrologic
Fifth-Code Hydrologic
Unit
Landscape
Position/
Waterbody Type
Landform
Water
Flow Path
Ashley
Creek
Finley
Point
Flathead
Lake
Flathead River- Good
Columbia Falls Creek
Deepwater
Inflow
Isolated
Outflow
214.7
Throughflow
2,195.8
78.2
60,541.0
150.3
Lentic
Basin
Bidirectional
Isolated
Throughflow
10.4
0.0
211.1
Inflow
Fringe
Bidirectional
Throughflow
Isolated
20.3
1.0
63.7
57.7
Island
Throughflow
0.3
Lotic River
Floodplain
Fringe
Basin
Island
Throughflow
Throughflow
Throughflow
Throughflow
185.7
91.0
34.7
42.0
Lotic Stream
Basin
Island
Throughflow
Throughflow
165.7
108.3 4.7
Fringe
Throughflow
0.6
3.2
Terrene
Island
Throughflow
Basin
Inflow
0.7
0.2
Isolated
13.4
8.4
85.1 5.7
Outflow
0.7
0.7
Throughflow
1.5
Slope
Inflow
Isolated
7.6
1.2
24.1 4.3
Outflow
0.3
1.9 1.7
Throughflow
1.6
Fringe
Inflow
Isolated
Outflow
18.5
29
Table 10. Hydrogeomor^
unit. (Continued)
vhic types mapped (in acres) with the Flathead change detection analysis
area by fifth-code hydrologic
Fifth-Code Hydrologic Unit
Landscape
Position/
Waterbody Type
Landform
Water
Flow Path
Lake
Mary
Ronan
Lower
Logan Hungry
Creek Horse
Reservoir
Lower
Stillwater
River
Lower
Swan
River
Deepwater
Inflow
Isolated
Outflow
0.4
Throughflow
1,586.0
36.4
24.4
Lentic
Basin
Bidirectional
Isolated
28.2
Throughflow
24.3
18.4
6.5
Inflow
Fringe
Bidirectional
Throughflow
Isolated
2.1
lO.O
107.6
22.3
Island
Throughflow
0.9
Lotic River
Floodplain
Fringe
Basin
Island
Throughflow
Throughflow
Throughflow
Throughflow
90.6 2.0
1.6
0.8
II.O
0.1
Lotic Stream
Basin
Island
Fringe
Throughflow
Throughflow
Throughflow
61.9
0.4
40.7
5.3
Terrene
Island
Basin
Throughflow
Inflow
Isolated
6.6
2.9
91.2
11.9
Outflow
12.1
Throughflow
Slope
Inflow
Isolated
2.3
1.7
20.1
Outflow
2.7
Throughflow
Fringe
Inflow
Isolated
Outflow
30
Table 10. Hydrogeomorphic types mapped (in acres) with the Flathead change detection analysis area by fifth-code hydrologic
unit. (Continued)
Fifth-Code
Hydrologic
Unit
Landscape
Position/
Waterbody Type
Landform
Water
Flow Path
Middle Fork Flathead
River-Lake McDonald
Middle
Swan
River
North Fork
Flathead River-
Camas Creek
Deepwater
Inflow
Isolated
Outflow
Throughflow
Lentic
Basin
Fringe
Island
Bidirectional
Isolated
Throughflow
Inflow
Bidirectional
Throughflow
Isolated
Throughflow
45.7
16.3
Lotic River
Floodplain
Throughflow
44.4
Fringe
Throughflow
24.1
Basin
Throughflow
3.7
Island
Throughflow
3.3
Lotic Stream
Basin
Island
Throughflow
Throughflow
Fringe
Throughflow
0.9
Terrene
Island
Basin
Slope
Fringe
Throughflow
Inflow
Isolated
Outflow
Throughflow
Inflow
Isolated
Outflow
Throughflow
Inflow
Isolated
Outflow
31
Table 10. Hydroge amorphic types mapped (in acres) with the Flathead change detection analysis area by fifth-code hydrologic
unit. (Continued)
Fifth-Code Hydrologic Unit
Landscape
Water
Flow Path
Upper
Upper Little Upper
Whitefish
River
Position/
Land form
Hungry Horse Bitteroot Stillwater
Waterbody Type
Reservoir River River
Deepwater
Inflow
Isolated
Outflow
25.7
Throughflow
722.2
3,307.2
Lentic
Basin
Bidirectional
Isolated
Throughflow
70.0
3.0
Inflow
Fringe
Bidirectional
Throughflow
Isolated
133.8
Island
Throughflow
Lotic River
Floodplain
Fringe
Basin
Island
Throughflow
Throughflow
Throughflow
Throughflow
Lotic Stream
Basin
Throughflow
1 .4 6.4
14.9
Island
Throughflow
0.6
Fringe
Throughflow
3.4
Terrene
Island
Basin
Throughflow
Inflow
Isolated
1 .6 2.2 8.0
15.0
Outflow
0.9 1.2
Throughflow
16.4
Slope
Inflow
5.7
Isolated
2.6 12.2
1.0
Outflow
Throughflow
Fringe
Inflow
Isolated
Outflow
32
Table II. Predicted change in wetland Junctional capacity between 1981 and 2005 within the
Flathead change detection analysis area.
Predicted %
1981
2005
Change in
Functional
Functional
Functional
Function
Units
Units
Capacity
Hydrology
Water Storage
234,922.8
211,310.1
-10.1
Streamflow Maintenance
236,254.2
212,592.6
-10.0
Groundwater Recharge
89,614.3
73,147.8
-18.4
Biogeochemical
Nutrient Cycling
193,539.8
202,264.6
4.5
Sediment Retention
121,675.3
133,173.7
9.5
Shoreline Stabilization
236,781.0
213,047.8
-10.0
Habitat
Native Plant Community Maintenance
232,431.2
211,603.2
-9.0
Terrestrial Habitat
231,751.4
211,355.1
-8.8
Aquatic Habitat
120,405.7
134,568.6
11.8
Conservation of Wetland Biodiversity
234,264.4
212,244.1
-9.4
33
Discussion
Our analysis showed relatively little overall change
in wetland area between 1981 and 2005. Yet
differences in land area alone do not adequately
convey the cumulative change and potential loss
of wetland functions, as this and other studies have
shown (Syphard and Garcia 2001, Tiner 2005).
Wetlands in the Flathead Valley have experienced
a loss in functional capacity, particularly in terms
of functions related to hydrology and habitat.
Additionally, analysis of changes in land cover
type around wetlands showed relatively large areas
of forest and grassland/shrub have been converted
to agricultural and urban types. These changes
have likely affected not only the quality of these
wetlands, but also the spatial extent and pattern of
wetlands on the landscape, resulting in a loss of
connectivity, reduced water quality, and a reduction
in overall wetland integrity.
General Limitations of the Study
Limitations exist with any wetland mapping
effort derived almost exclusively from
photointerpretation techniques (Tiner 2005).
Factors such as photo quality, scale, and
environmental conditions at the time of photo
acquisition can affect mapping accuracy. Similarly,
comparisons between historic and updated wetland
mapping are also limited by differences in imagery
and mapping scale. Technological advances
associated with mapping techniques have greatly
increased our capacity to capture more detailed
information. Additionally, temporarily and
seasonally flooded wetlands that typically dry out
by the end of the growing season may be difficult
to reliably separate from upland areas.
Limitations also exist with wetland functional
assessments based solely on photointerpretation
and best professional judgment. We emphasize
the functional capacity ratings assigned to
wetlands in this project are only potential
capacities. Data on actual functional capacity
would require extensive field checking. The
estimated changes in functional capacities may
also be. in part, a byproduct of changes in mapping
conventions, specifically the addition of the
riparian classification system. Palustrine forested
and palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands associated
with lotic features, which are most effective at
performing hydrologic and habitat functions, may
have been overmapped in the 1 98 1 N WI wetland
mapping. Our wetland change analysis revealed
some wetlands originally mapped as palustrine
forested and palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands were
mapped as riparian forest and riparian scrub-shrub
in the new mapping, so this reduction in mapped
wetland area influenced our estimated changes in
functional capacity. Because riparian areas were
not mapped in the original mapping effort, many
forested and scrub-shrub areas along streams
and rivers were mapped as wetland rather than
excluded completely. Additionally, it is often
difficult to distinguish between palustrine and
riparian types based on aerial imagery alone, and
the original wetland mapping had only cursory
ground-truthing. In addition to differences in
photointerpretation, the dynamic nature of lotic
systems naturally influences the type, location,
and extent of floodplain wetlands and changes
can be expected over multiple decades. However,
anthropogenic factors such as dams, riprap, and
increased water demands have almost certainly
impacted the hydrology of these floodplain
wetlands.
Additionally, this assessment does not consider the
condition of the adjacent uplands or the wetland
itself two factors critical to assessing the integrity
of the wetland. Wetland function depends largely
on wetland type (Brinson 1993), but we could
not evaluate the effect changes in wetland type
between 1 98 1 and 2005 have had on changes in
wetland function. Thus, extensive ecological
integrity assessments are required to fully capture
the condition and functional capacity of wetlands
in the study area.
This analysis should be considered a preliminary
assessment of changes in Flathead Valley wetlands
and wetland functional capacity. Although this
analysis provides general information on the ability
of wetlands in the area to perform certain functions,
it does not assess differences in functional capacity
among wetlands of similar type and function.
34
Despite these limitations, data from this analysis
can provide very effective conservation tools. For
example, detailed wetland and riparian maps can be
used to identify areas with the potential to perform
wetland functions most effectively, allowing
natural resource managers and other stakeholders
to focus or prioritize their conservation and
restoration efforts. Accurate, digital wetland
data at a watershed scale can also provide the
foundation for initiation and tracking of watershed
restoration and monitoring efforts, as well as
a method to inform watershed councils, local
planners, land managers, and other stakeholders
about the types and location of wetlands within the
Flathead Valley and the functions they perform.
35
Literature Cited
Alt, D., and D.W. Hyndman. 1986. Roadside geol-
ogy of Montana. Mountain Press Publishing
Company, Missoula, MT. 427 pp.
Beyer, H.L. 2004. Hawth's Analysis Tools for
ArcGIS. Available at littp://w\vw.spatialecol-
ogy.com/htools.
Brinson, M.M. 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classi-
fication for wetlands. Technical Report WRP-
DE-4, Waterways Experiment Station, Army
Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T.
LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and
deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.
FWS/OBS-79/3 1 .
Dahl. T.E. 2000. Status and trends of wetlands in
the conterminous United Sates 1986 to 1997.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington,
D.C.
Dahl, T.E. 2006. Status and trends of wetlands in
the conterminous United States 1998 to 2004.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington,
D.C.
Dahl, T.E., and C.E.Johnson. 1991. Status and
trends in the conterminous United States, mid-
1970's to mid-1980's. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Washington, D.C.
Elwood, H.E. 1980. Kalispell and the upper Flat-
head Valley. Thomas Printing, Inc., Kalispell,
Montana.
ESRl. 2006. ArcGIS 9.2. ESRI Corporation, Red-
lands, California.
Frayer, W.E., T.J. Monahan, D.C. Bowden, and
F.A. Graybill. 1983. Status and trends of wet-
lands and deepwater habitats in the contermi-
nous United States, 1950's to 1970's. Colorado
State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Greenlee, J.T. 1999. Ecologically significant
wetlands in the Flathead, Stillwater, and Swan
River Valleys. Unpublished report to the
Montana Department of Environmental Quality.
Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena,
Montana. 192 pp.
Hauer, F.R., B.J. Cook. M.C. Gilbert, E.J. Clairain,
and R.D. Smith. 2002. A regional guidebook
for applying the hydrogeomorphic approach
to assessing wetland functions of riverine
floodplains in the Northern Rocky Mountains.
ERDC/ELTR-02-21, U.S. Army Engineer
Research and Development Center, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.
Headwaters Economics. 2007a. A socioeconomic
profile, Flathead County, Montana. Produced
by the Economic Profile System. Headwaters
Economics, Bozeman, Montana.
Headwaters Economics. 2007b. A socioeconomic
profile. Lake County, Montana. Produced by
the Economic Profile System. Headwaters Eco-
nomics, Bozeman, Montana.
Johnson, B. 2005. Hydrogeomorphic wetland pro-
filing: an approach to landscape and cumula-
tive impacts analysis. EPA/620/R05/001. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D.C.
Kincaid, T., T. Olsen, D. Stevens, C. Piatt, D.
White, and R. Remington. 2008. spsurvey:
Spatial Survey Design and Analysis. R package
version 2.0. http://www.epa.gov/nheerl/arm/
Kudray, G.M., and T Schemm. 2008. Wetlands
of the Bitterroot Valley: Change and ecological
functions. Report to the Montana Department
of Environmental Quality. Montana Natural
Heritage Program, Helena, Montana. 32 pp.
plus appendices.
36
McKay, K.L. 1994. Trails of the past: histori-
cal overview of the Flathead National Forest,
Montana, 1800-1960. USDA Forest Service,
Flathead National Forest, Kalispell, Montana.
351 pp.
McKay, K.L. 1997. Looking back: a pictorial his-
tory of the Flathead Valley, Montana. A North-
west Montana Historical Society Publication.
The Donning Company Publishers. 224 pp.
Omemik, J.M. 1987. Ecoregions of the conter-
minous United States. Map (scale 1:7,500,00).
Annals of the Association of American Geogra-
phers 77:118-125.
PPL Montana. 2008. Kerr Dam. http://www.
pplmontana.com/producing+power/
power+plants/Kerrt-Dam.htm. Accessed De-
cember 2008.
R Development Core Team. 2008. R: A language
and environment for statistical computing. R
Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna,
Austria. ISBN 3-90005 1 -07-0, URL http://
www.R-project.org.
Sirucek, D.A., and VC. Bachurski. 1995. Riparian
landtype survey of the Flathead National Forest
area, Montana. USDA Forest Service, Flathead
National Forest, Kalispell, Montana.
Syphard, A. D., and M.W. Garcia. 2001. Human-
and beaver-induced wetland changes in the
Chickahominy River Watershed from 1953 to
1994. Wetlands 21:342-353.
Tiner, R.W. 2003. Dichotomous keys and map-
ping codes for wetland landscape position,
landform, water flow path, and waterbody type
descriptions. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
National Wetlands Inventory Program, North-
east Region, Hadley, Massachusetts. 44 pp.
Tiner, R.W. 2005. Assessing cumulative loss
of wetland functions in the Nanticoke River
Watershed using enhanced National Wetlands
Inventory data. Wetlands 25:405-419.
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 2008. Hungry Horse
Project, http://www.usbr. gov/dataweb/htm 1/
hungryho.html. Accessed December 2008.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2008. State & County
QuickFacts, Montana. http://quickfacts.census.
gov/qfd/states/30000.html. Accessed December
2008.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1997. A sys-
tem for mapping riparian areas in the western
United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.,
Washington, DC. 15 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004a. National
standards and quality components for wetlands,
deepwater, and related habitat mapping. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Arlington, VA. 19
pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004b. Technical
procedures for mapping wetland, deepwater,
and related habitats. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Branch of Habitat Assessment, Arling-
ton, Virginia. 46 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2005. Technical
procedures for wetlands status and trends. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Branch of Habitat
Assessment, Arlington, Virginia. 6 1 pp.
Vance, L.K. 2009. Geographically isolated wet-
lands and intermittent/ephemeral streams in
Montana: Extent distribution, and function.
Report to the Montana Department of Envi-
ronmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Montana Natural Heritage
Program, Helena, Montana. 33 pp.
Vance, L.K., G.M. Kudray, and S.V Cooper.
2006. Crosswalking National Wetland Inven-
tory attributes to hydrogeomorphic functions
and vegetation communities: a pilot study in
the Gallatin Valley, Montana. Report to the
Montana Department of Environmental Quality
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena,
Montana. 37 pp plus appendices.
37
Vogelmann, J.E., S.M. Howard, L. Yang, C.R.
Larson, B.K. Wylie, and J.N. Van Driel. 2001 .
Completion of the 1990's National Land Cover
Data Set for the conterminous United States,
Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote
Sensing 67:650-662.
Western Regional Climate Center. 2008. Western
U.S. climate historical summaries. (http://www.
wrcc.dri.edu/Climsum.html). Desert Research
Institute, Reno, Nevada. Accessed November
2008.
38
Appendix A. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater
Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al. 1979)
<
o
<0
<
_l
o
(0
m
<
X
LU
I-
<
Q.
LU
HI
O
<
(0
Q
LU
.J
■<
a
-P-
u
H
S
M
•*• pa
•3 ; -s g
5 3 S S 3 c
I I I I
> ?
-3 I
5i
< a: S tS
-° -3 -□ S
= aj ?
Q
o
is
si
O-IU
H
>
in
<
u
12
I
11
alls
fl6
= 1
II
1 i^t-
is
11
3 U -D 't"
3 J ^ tS
_-S 3 I I
-< oi u, ^ ^
U c« S O
§a
en S O
.J
S
2
-J
o
B
3 S ^ = e
111 III
^ < cri E ::> o
C
- r. .-1 -T wn -3
Is
'ttl
IS
w >-
H c^o
?;§
C« Cfl
5
%i
lllilll
pa o: o c« 2 O >
ii
— 1-1 f^ -3- >n 'O t-
o 5
Appendix A- I
<
o
CO
0}
<
_l
o
(0
I-
<
ffl
<
X
UJ
I-
§
Q.
UJ
U
Q
Q
Z
<
03
O
Ui
OS
o
O
Z
pa
8g
<
:d q
OBJ
< m
^2
o o
pi m
II
5Soi
IP'S =
si
2
23
u
r
_S
ei
H
D
oi
P
<
a
<
ft.—
s
1 „^
ll|IS
ft.
^s
™ i i
T ? o -
< ■< « 0
3* * i
3 S = 5
5 § K P
"3=3 "S ^ -g "5 g>
cQ z; m :z Q Ci uj
II
111
<
« 3 u 1 "^
<
lilfll
<
- r^ ^ T -^ -a
Q
t^
■<
H
ii
111
L
=1
H
1/3
(« 3
« p
II
~ss
S
^
Ed
H
M
W3
H
Vi
^
>
<
1
t/1
>: ii
j; E
&,!/) "O
lyi
■^1 ^
a;
Q < ci-nj
tT
Q
O
2
—1
"2
<
■^
~
o
Ci
UJ
•a
o.
t/^
« ■£ £
£
^ -ra —
^
7i
^
11
- =
11
o
OS
— T3
£ «
5 1
^
S =
ll
1
i 1 =
s S
^
1 lis
j; >.
X
_ < u <
M <0 — -
S E
o;
1 1
•;
2 E
-i
c 1 "1
UJ
R n 9 -S
H
X
1
? a 5 S
X UJ S tt
r- 00 a^ c
ct
o ^
UJ
-
sis
!
Hf 5
£.
1
i
1 I
1
1
■a "Z
5 5
1 s
3 i^ ^1
2 ■? c y = y 5
1 i
• • • * Z3 ^ c
^ ^
is
« «
""5
ffl -^
1 ^
1 III ll
E ^
^ ^ £ C * ~
tr >=
II
lllfl
^ = ^ ^ B
;.: J S z o!
o
1
Q.
5
5
UJ
a;
S
i
llfiliilis
ililliiiil
1
X -^ i^ S >- N :d
H
c
j II 1 ft
>. u: s: J £ a ■=
s 1 1 1 S i It i
■a
o
z
Appendix A - 2
Appendix B. Classification of Riparian Systems
(USFWS 1997)
a^
I-
CO
36
a
wo
Q
OS
06
U
III
fc_ GO ^ B
l.-i l- «
5> [35 ;S
OOG"?^ ^^ flD O 2 o
i.il^°^--
lllli
1*111-
ais^a^^i^St
s- 9 »
^|g| LI
11- I ill I I
S
u
g
te
s
fe
ce
pp
>•
U3
c«
M
en
PQ
Appendix B - 1
Appendix C. Flowchart for Hydrogeomorphic (HGM)
Coding of Wetland Polygons
1
Natural Lake
2
Dammed River Valley
3
Other Dammed Lake
4
Excavated Lake
1
IN
ou
1
TH
IS
-RV 1
R2, 3
. UB. SB J
m
<
R2, 3, 4 ■
UB. SB ^
1
'■
Slope
1
Low Gradient <2%
2
Middle Gradient >2 - <
4%
3
High Gradient > 4%
Water Flow
4 1 Intennittenl
For Speoal Modifiers
h 1 Dammed
LS
Slope
Low Gradient <2%
Middle Gradient >2 - < 4%
High Gradient > 4%
For Speaal Modifiers
Partially Drained/ Ditched
Dammed/Diked/I mpounded
Slope
Low Gradient <2%
Middle Gradient >2 - < 4%
High Gradient > 4%
For Special Modifiers
Partially Drained/Ditched
Dammed/Diked/Impounded
LE
Natural Lake
Dammed River Valley
Other Dammed Lake
Excavated Lake
BA
FR
TH
PEMA/C,
PSSA/C,
PFOA/C;
PAB/PUB
TH
P__B,
P__F,
P G,
P__H,
PUSA,
PUSC
Bl
L2
(for littoral
zone
around a
deeper
■ lake) .
^''
i
For Special Modifiers 1
b
Beaver
d
Partially Dramed/Ditched
f
Farmed
ti
Dammed/Diked/Impounded
X
Excavated
p
Water bodies
1
BA
r~n.
IL FR
OU
Wetlands
that are
the
source
of streams
V ^
TH
IS
Fnnge
around
ponds
P F,
P G,
P H
Appendix C - 1
Appendix D. Key to Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Modifiers,
Adapted from Tiner (2003)
Key A-1: Key to Wetland Landscape Position
1. Wetland is completely surrounded by upland (non-hydric soils) Terrene
Go to couplet 'd' below
1. Wetland is not surrounded by upland but is connected to a waterbody or other wetland 2
2. Wetland is located in or along a lake or reservoir (permanent waterbody where
standing water is typically deeper than 6.6 feet or larger than 20 acres), including
streamside wetlands in a lake basin Lentic
Go to couplet 'a' below
Note: Lentic wetlands consist of all wetlands in a lake basin (i.e., the depression contain-
ing the lake), including lakeside wetlands intersected by streams emptying into the lake.
The upstream limit of lentic wetlands is defined by the upstream influence of the lake,
which is usually approximated by the limits of the lake basin. Streamside lentic wetlands
are designated Throughflow, thereby emphasizing the stream flow through these wet-
lands.
2. Wetland does not occur along a lake or reservoir 3
3. Wetland is located in a river or stream (including in-stream ponds), within its banks,
or on its floodplain and is periodically flooded by the river or stream 4
3. Wetland is not located in a river or stream or on its floodplain OR wetlands along
streams are NOT subject to frequent overflows Terrene
4. Wetland is the source of a river or stream, but there is no channelized flow through
the wetland Terrene
4. Wetland is located in a river or stream, within its banks, or on its floodplain 5
5. Wetland is associated wdth a river (mapped as a 2-lined watercourse on 1 :24,000
U.S.G.S. topographic map) or its floodplain Lotic River
Go to Modifiers 'b', 'c', and 'd' below
5. Wetland is associated with a stream (single-line watercourse on 1 :24,000 U.S.G.S.
topographic map) or its floodplain Lotic Stream
Go to Modifiers 'b', 'c', and 'd' below
a. Wetland is associated with a natural water body Natural Lake
a. Wetland is associated with a waterbody created by a dammed
river valley Dammed River Valley
a. Wetland is associated with a waterbody created by another
obstruction Other Dammed Lake
a. Wetland is associated with a waterbody that has been excavated Excavated Lake
Appendix D - I
Slope Modifiers
b. Water flow is generally slow with extensive floodplain development (Cowardin's
Lower Perennial Subsystem) Low Gradient
b. Water flow is moderate to fast with little to some floodplain development
(Cowardin's Upper Perennial Subsystem) Middle Gradient
b. Water flow is rapid due to steep gradient with little or no floodplain
development (Cowardin's Upper Perennial Subsystem) High Gradient
Water Flow Modifier
c. Water flow is intermittent or ephemeral (as indicated on the high resolution
National Hydrography Dataset) Intermittent
Other Special Modifiers
d. Wetland is modified by a beaver dam Beaver
d. Wetland is modified by a ditch or has been partially drained Partially Drained/Ditch
d. Wetland has been farmed Farmed
d. Water flow or wetland modified by dam, dike, or
impoundment Dammed/Diked/Impounded
d. Wetland or waterbody has been modified by excavation Excavated
d. Wetland forms a waterbody less than 6.6 feet deep or smaller than 20 acres.
This includes in-stream ponds Pond
Key B-1: Key to Landforms
1. Wetland hydrology is largely influenced by groundwater discharge to the surface
(can occur on nearly flat landscapes) or wetland occurs on a slope of at least 4% Slope
1. Wetland hydrology is influenced by a number of sources 2
2. Wetland occurs on an island Island
2. Wetland does not occur on an island 3
3. Wetland occurs with the banks of a river or stream or along the shores of a pond, lake,
or island and is either (1) vegetated and at least saturated or semi-permanently flooded
or (2) a non-vegetated bank or shore that is temporarily or seasonally flooded Fringe
3. Wetland does not occur along a bank or shore 4
4. Wetland occurs on a floodplain of a Lotic River Floodplain
4. Wetland does not occur on a floodplain of a Lotic River 5
5. Wetland exists in a distinct depression in various landscape positions Basin
5. Wetland receives virtually no groundwater discharge (playa) Flat
Appendix D - 2
Key C-1: Key to Water Flow Paths
1. Water levels fluctuate due to lake influences or variable river levels, but water does
not flow through the wetland Bidirectional
1. Wetland is not influenced by fluctuating water levels 2
2. Wetland receives surface or groundwater from a watercourse, other waterbody, or
from another wetland at a higher elevation and surface or groundwater passes through
it to a watercourse, other waterbody, or another wetland at a lower elevation Throughflow
2. Water does not pass through the wetland to other wetlands or waters 3
3. Wetland is in a closed depression (based on closed elevation contours) or flat areas
where water comes from surface water runoff and/or groundwater discharge. Isolated
wetlands lack channelized surface water inflow and outflow Isolated
3. Wetland is not hydrologically or geographically isolated 4
4. Wetland exists in a sink where no outlet exists, yet water enters via an intermittent or
perennial stream or from a wetland at a higher elevation Inflow
4. Wetland receives no surface or groundwater inflow from a wetland or other permanent
waterbody at a higher elevation and water is discharged from the wetland to a
watercourse, waterbody, or other wetland at a lower elevation Outflow
Key D-1: Key to Waterbody Types
1. Waterbody is predominantly flowing water 2
1. Waterbody is predominantly standing water 3
2. Waterbody is a polygonal feature on a U.S.G.S. topographic map (1:24,000) River
2. Waterbody is a linear feature on a U.S.G.S. topographic map (1:24,000) Stream
Go to couplets 'b', 'c', and 'd' below
3. Waterbody is permanently flooded and deep (> 6.6 feet) Deep Water
Go to couplet 'a' below
a. Waterbody is created by a dammed river valley Dammed River Valley
a. Waterbody is created by another obstruction Other Dammed Lake
a. Waterbody has been excavated Excavated Lake
a. Waterbody is natural Natural Lake
Appendix D - 3
Slope Modifiers
b. Water flow is generally slow with extensive floodplain development (Cowardin's
Lower Perennial Subsystem) Low Gradient
b. Water flow is moderate to fast with little to some floodplain development
(Cowardin's Upper Perennial Subsystem) Middle Gradient
b. Water flow is rapid due to steep gradient with little or no floodplain
development (Cowardin's Upper Perennial Subsystem) High Gradient
Water Flow Modifier
c. Water flow is intermittent or ephemeral (as indicated on the high resolution
National Hydrography Dataset) Intermittent
Other Special Modifiers
d. Water flow is dammed Dammed
Appendix D - 4
Appendix E. Relative Functional Performance Levels for
Wetlands Classified with National Wetland Inventory
(NWI) AND Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Codes.
(a rank of "1" INDICATES A HIGH PERFORMANCE LEVEL;
A RANK OF "2" INDICATES A MODERATE PERFORMANCE LEVEL;
AND A RANK OF "3" INDICATES A LOW PERFORMANCE LEVEL)
NWI
Code
HGM Code
Acres
Water
Storage
Stream How
Maintenance
Groundwater
Recharge
Nutrient
Cycling
Sediment
Retention
Shoreline
Stabilization
Native Plant
Community
Maintenance
Terrestrial
Habitat
Aquatic
Habitat
Conservation
ofWedand
Biodiversity
LIUBG
DWIIS
04
3
2
LIUBG
DWITH
40 0
LIUBH
DWIIN
2147
LIUBH
DWIIS
3 7
LIUBH
DWIOU
25 7
LIUBH
DWITH
7785 8
LILIBHh
DW2TH
60856 1
L2ABO
LEI BATH
44 3
L2ABG
LEIFRBI
143 6
L2ABH
LEIFRBI
161 5
L2ABG
LE 1 FRIS
33 7
L2ABG
LEIFRTH
41<)9
L2ABH
LEIILTH
09
L2UBH
LEIFRBI
28 3
L2ABGh
I.F2FRBI
1 0
L2USA
LEI BATH
02
L2USA
LEIFRBI
20
L2USC
LEIBAIS
28 2
PABF
LEIpBATH
36
PABF
LE2pBATH
08
PABF
LRIpBATH
24 8
PABF
LSHpBATH
90
2
PABF
LSlpBATH
06
2
PABF
TEpBAIN
02
2
PABF
TEpBAlS
82
2
PABF
TEpBAOU
08
2
PABFb
LRIbpBATH
3 7
2
PABFb
LSlbpBATH
06
2
PABFb
LS3bpBATH
3 7
2
PABFli
LRIhpBATH
I 7
PABFh
LSHhpBATH
36
PABFh
LSShpBATH
63
PABFh
TEhpBAIS
02
PABFx
LRIxpBATH
0 1
PABFx
LS24xpBATH
03
PABFx
LS2itpBATH
02
PABFx
TExpBAIN
03
PABFx
TExpBAIS
38
PABG
LEIpBATH
02
PABO
LRIpBATH
49
PABG
LSlpBATH
23
PABG
LSMpBATH
3 4
PABG
LS3pBATH
38
PABG
TEpBAIS
440
PABGb
TEbpBAIS
28
PABG
TEpBAOU
08
PABGx
LRIxpBATH
33
PABGx
LS34xpBATH
06
PABGx
TExpBAIS
I 5
PABH
TEpBATH
164
PEMA
LEI BATH
120 9
PEMA
LRIFPTH
156 9
PEMA
LSI4BATH
90 9
PEMA
LSI BATH
89
PEMA
LSIILTH
01
PEMA
LS24BATH
85 7
PEMA
LS2BATH
30 9
PEMA
LS34BATH
124
PEMA
LS3BATH
23 3
PEMA
TEBAIS
1044
PEMA
TEBAOU
12 7
PEMA
TEBATH
I 5
PEMA
TESUS
48
PEMB
LS3FRTH
08
PEMB
LS34FRTH
40
PEMB
TESLIN
57
PEMB
TESLIS
43 8
PEMB
TESLOU
63
2
Appendix E- J
NWI
Code
HGMCode
Acres
Water
Storage
SireamBow
Maintenance
Groundwater
Recharge
NulrienI
Cycling
Sediment
Retention
Shoreline
Stabilization
Native Plant
Community
Maintenance
Terrestrial
HabiUt
Aquatic
HabiUt
Conservation
ofWeUand
Biodiversity
PEMC
LEI BATH
184 4
2
3
2
PEMC
LRIFPTH
41 2
2
2
2
PEMC
LSI4BATH
22 5
2
PEMC
LS24BATH
02
PEMC
LS2BATH
I 4
PEMC
LSIBATH
24 7
PEMC
I.S34BATH
113
PEMC
LS3BATH
4 5
PEMC
TEBAIN
1 5
PEMC
TEBAIS
60 7
PEMC
TEBAOU
1 4
PEMC
TESUS
21 <>
PEMC
TESLOU
03
PEMCd
LSI4dBATH
94 0
PEMCd
LSIdBATH
162
PEMCd
LS24dBATH
1 9
2
PEMCh
LEIhBATH
9 1
2
PEMCh
LE2hILTH
03
2
PEMCh
TEhBAIS
08
PEMF
LEIFRTH
97 5
PEMF
LRIFPTH
130
PEMF
LRIFRTH
24 2
PEMF
LRIILTH
36
PEMF
LS14BATH
198
PEMF
LSIBATH
1 5
PEMF
LS34BATH
1 9
PEMF
LS14FRTH
06
PEMF
LSIFRTH
02
PEMF
TEBAIS
14 j
PEMF
TEFRIS
18 5
PEMF
TESLIS
09
PEMFb
LSIbBATH
1 2
PEMFh
LE2FRTH
1 9
PEMFh
TEhBAIS
02
PFOA
LEI BATH
02
PFOA
LR14FPTH
0 3
PFOA
LRIFPTH
96 4
PFOA
LSIBATH
1 7
PFOA
TEBAIS
22
PFOA
TESLTH
1 6
PFOA
TESUS
22
PSSA
LEI BATH
67
PSSA
LE2BATH
3 1
PSSA
LRIFPTH
105 7
PSSA
LRIILTH
93
PSSA
LSI4BATH
14 0
PSSA
LSIBATH
20 3
PSSA
LSIILTH
05
PSSA
LS2BATH
57
PSSA
LS34BATH
80
PSSA
LS3BATH
43
PSSA
TEBAIS
1 5
PSSA
TEBAOU
1 0
PSSA
TEBATH
5 1
PSSA
TESUS
65
PSSA
TESLOU
03
PSSB
TESUS
5 7
PSSB
LS34BATH
1 1
PSSC
LEI BATH
167
PSSC
LRIFPTH
179
PSSC
LSIBATH
05
PSSC
LSI4BATH
27
PSSC
LS2BATH
87
PSSC
LS34BATH
I 2
PSSC
LS3BATH
40
PUBFh
TEhpBAIS
05
PUBFx
TExpBAIS
60
PUSA
LSMBATH
09
PUSC
TEBAIN
05
2
Appendix E- 2
NWI
Code
HGM Code
Acres
Water
Storage
Stream flow
Maintenance
Groundwater
Recharge
Nutrient
Cycling
Sediment
Retention
Shoreline
Stabilization
Native Plant
Community
Maintenance
Terrestrial
Habitat
Aquatic
Habitat
Conservation
ofWeUand
Biodiversity
PUSC
ThBAlS
45
1
3
PUSCx
TExBAIS
74
3
3
R2UBH
RVI
369 2
3
3
R2USA
LRIFRTH
66 8
2
3
R2USA
LRllLTH
15 1
2
2
R2USC
LRIFRTH
7)1)
3
3
R3USA
LRIFRTH
24 1
2
3
R3USA
LRIILTH
189
2
2
WUSA
LSIFRTH
34
2
3
lUUBH
RVI
2703 0
3
3
RJUSC
LRIFRTH
146 6
3
3
R3USC
LRIILTH
36 3
3
2
R3USC
LSIFRTH
120
3
)
2
Appendix E- 3
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11